INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

HIV/AIDS Strategy

Hilary Benn: I have placed in the Libraries of both Houses copies of "Taking Action: The UK's Strategy for tackling HIV and AIDS in the Developing World" which I published today.
	This paper is being published by the Department for International Development (DFID) but the following Government Departments worked with DFID to help produce it: the Department of Health, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, HM Treasury, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Patent Office, the Inland Revenue, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office, the Department for Education and Skills and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
	AIDS is one of the greatest threats to eradicating poverty and achieving the millennium development goals. Over the last 25 years the number of people affected by HIV has risen dramatically, from the first AIDS cases identified in the 1980s to the 38 million who are living with HIV and AIDS today. Over 20 million people have died. Sub-Saharan Africa has suffered the severest impact: over 25 million people are currently living with HIV and AIDS and 12 million children have been orphaned by AIDS. By 2010 the number of orphans who will have lost parents to AIDS may rise to 18 million. In Asia and eastern Europe, there is a serious risk of a generalised epidemic unless action is taken now. In all regions, women and young people are particularly vulnerable.
	The UK Government are committed to fighting AIDS and reversing the spread of HIV. The challenges facing the world were set out in the "UK's Call for Action on HIV/AIDS" published on world AIDS day last year. "Taking Action: The UK's Strategy for Tackling HIV and AIDS in the Developing World" sets out how the UK will respond to the challenges by promoting a comprehensive response to tackle prevention, treatment and care as well as addressing the social impact of AIDS; prioritising the needs of women, young people, including orphans and other children; focusing on human rights, stigma and discrimination; and ensuring that action on AIDS is sustainable in the long term as well as responsive to immediate needs.
	As announced in the spending review, the UK Government will commit at least £1.5 billion over the next three years to tackle AIDS in the developing world. Of this, at least £150 million will be dedicated to helping orphans and other children made vulnerable by AIDS, especially in Africa. We will also be doubling our contribution to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and malaria with an additional £77 million over the next three years. This is in addition to extra money for UNAIDS and UNFPA announced in my statement of 6 July.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies

Ben Bradshaw: A progress report on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in Great Britain was placed in the Library of the House today.
	The report explains primarily how we have managed BSE during 2003. The encouraging reduction in BSE in cattle continues. This shows that the controls that have been put in place are continuing to have an important effect.
	The report explains the background to our application to the European Commission to be classified as a Moderate BSE risk, which will help to re-open exports markets for UK beef; it also outlines the progress of the TSE surveillance programme. It provides an overview of TSE research and sets out progress on the national scrapie plan, as well as our continuing efforts to ensure compliance with the rules on specified risk material and animal feed.
	The report is being published on DEFRA's website at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/bse/index.html.

TREASURY

Tonnage Tax (Post-Implementation Review)

Dawn Primarolo: The tonnage tax was introduced in 2000 as part of a package of measures to revive the UK shipping industry. In July 2002, I announced that the Inland Revenue and the Department for Transport would commence a review of the way the regime is operating, and invited public contributions. A number of representations have been received. Individuals and groups wishing to make further representations are invited to do so by 30 September 2004. Details about how representations can be made are available on the Inland Revenue's website.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Forensic Science Annual Report

John Spellar: I have today published the Forensic Science Northern Ireland annual report and accounts 2003–04. The annual report sets out performance of the agency against key targets. Copies of the report have today been laid before the House.

Independent Monitoring Commission (Second Report)

Paul Murphy: On 20 April 2004 I formally requested the Independent Monitoring Commission to prepare a security normalisation report under article 5(2) of the international agreement between the British and Irish Governments.
	Article 5(2) enables the British Government to commission the IMC to prepare a report on security normalisation activity undertaken over a specified period. I asked the IMC to report on all normalisation activities which have taken place since December 1999 up to the present time. The activities are set out in article 5(1)(a)(i) to (v) of the international agreement. The IMC report also takes account of views on the effects of normalisation on the ground and the programme of reform to deliver a community based policing environment in Northern Ireland. It is distinct from the monitoring of the programme of normalisation included in the joint declaration which is yet to be commenced.
	I am most grateful to the commission for its thorough report. The report is helpful in identifying the extent of steps that have been taken to reduce the security profile in Northern Ireland. The report also recognises that further steps are being taken, but that these must be measured against the prevailing assessment of the security threat.
	I have placed copies of the second report of the Independent Monitoring Commission in the Libraries of both Houses.

Youth Justice Agency (Annual Report and Accounts)

John Spellar: I have placed copies of the Youth Justice Agency's annual report and accounts for 2003–04 in the Libraries of both Houses.
	This is the agency's first annual report since its inception on 1 April 2003. It achieved eight of its nine key performance targets and all 20 of its development objectives.

Prison Service (Annual Report and Accounts)

Ian Pearson: I have placed copies of the Northern Ireland Prison Service's annual report and accounts for 2003–04 in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The annual report details that the service met seven of its 12 key targets in full and partially met an eighth. Of the comprehensive programme of 24 development objectives set for the service, 12 were achieved, four were partially achieved and substantial progress was made towards meeting the remaining eight.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Ordnance Survey (Framework Document)

Yvette Cooper: I am pleased to announce today that a new framework document for Ordnance Survey has been published and is also available in the Libraries of both Houses.
	On 23 July 2002 the Government announced that following a quinquennial review, Ordnance Survey, a non-ministerial Government Department, should retain its status as a Trading Fund and executive agency. It was also agreed that further work should be undertaken on three issues: freedoms and flexibilities that should be made available to Ordnance Survey; the provision and location of policy advice to government on geographic information; and issues surrounding Ordnance Survey's relationship with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
	The new framework document defines the role and responsibilities of, and delegations accorded to, Ordnance Survey. Ordnance Survey's delegations and freedoms are no different from all other trading funds. They have the ability to borrow funds, from the national loans fund, and have recruitment and retention flexibilities available that are consistent with those generally available to agencies acting at arms length from central Government, and operating within a commercial environment. A Treasury Minute was laid before the House setting a new financial target for Ordnance Survey on 15 January 2004.
	The Government have considered options for the provision of policy advice on geographic information. They have concluded that it is appropriate that the director general and chief executive of Ordnance Survey should remain as official advisor to Ministers on all aspects of survey, mapping and geographic information, and continue to provide advice to meet specific requests. The Government also separately recognise that there is scope for the creation of a geographic information panel to consider medium and long term strategic and policy issues. A panel would also provide a channel, to complement advice to Ministers provided by the director general, on the wider, more effective and systematic use of geographic information. The panel will be chaired for the first year by the director general and chief executive of Ordnance Survey with the intention of rotating the chair on an annual or biennial basis. Panel members will review the chairmanship annually and put recommendations to Ministers. The terms of reference and membership of the panel will be announced shortly.
	Ordnance Survey's relationship, as a non-ministerial government department and an executive agency, with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is set out in the Framework Document. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister acts in the capacity of protecting the Government's shareholding in Ordnance Survey, and as a customer for Ordnance Survey's data. It is important that at both ministerial and official levels, there is proper separation of responsibility between those who deal with the Government's investment in Ordnance Survey, and those taking decisions to purchase Ordnance Survey data. The Minister for Ordnance Survey will therefore play no part in any decisions or discussions relating to such commercially based transactions, primarily through the pan-government agreement for the supply of Ordnance Survey mapping data to Government. Arrangements will also be maintained to ensure that officials within this office are not in a position where they might be considered to hold conflicting responsibilities.
	The Government consider that Ordnance Survey has a critically important role to play in ensuring that the UK economy fully benefits from the availability of quality, up-to-date and definitive geographic information databases. Full and effective use of geographic information can generate significant benefits, opportunities and efficiencies for all those who have a requirement within their businesses and operations to use information that can be geographically referenced.
	The new framework document will enable Ordnance Survey to continue to develop and enhance their underpinning database, and ensure that products derived from the database are delivered in a manner that meets both customer and national requirements.

Park Homes (Consultation Paper on Implied Terms)

Keith Hill: My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister will publish for public consultation on 30 July, a paper on park home implied terms and a written statement.
	The Housing Bill includes several clauses that improve the rights of park home owners. These include two powers allowing the appropriate national authority (Secretary of State for England, and the National Assembly for Wales in relation to Wales) to make secondary legislation relating to the implied terms and the written statement.
	Provision has been made for the first exercise of the power to specify new implied terms, and to amend and delete existing ones, to have retrospective effect. It is therefore vital that we address all the important issues in the first exercise of the power. An affirmative resolution approving the order from both Houses of Parliament will be necessary.
	In the consultation paper we have proposed 22 changes to the implied terms on which we have already consulted informally. We propose, for example, amendments on, among other things, further tightening of the resale process, increased transparency in the payment system and more residents' rights through the quiet enjoyment of the pitch.
	The Housing Bill contains a re-enactment of the power of the appropriate national authority to prescribe requirements with which written statements must comply. The consultation paper proposes several changes to the requirements taking account of the proposed implied terms.
	Copies of the paper are being sent to a wide range of interested parties including local authorities, trade and resident associations, and others with an interest in this issue. The closing date for responses is 22 October.
	Copies of the paper will also be placed in the Libraries of the House, and will be available on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website at www.odpm.gov.uk.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Employment Tribunal Service (Performance Targets)

Gerry Sutcliffe: The employment tribunals service has published its annual report and accounts for 2003–04 today. Copies have been laid before Parliament and will be placed on the ETS website at http://www.ets.gov.uk.
	I have set the employment tribunals service the following targets for 2004–05:
	Quality
	75 per cent. of single employment tribunal cases to a first hearing within 26 weeks of receipt.
	Minimum to be achieved by all offices in relation to above target: 65 per cent.
	85 per cent. of employment tribunal decisions issued within four weeks of the final hearing.
	85 per cent. of employment tribunal users satisfied with the service offered by ETS.
	75 per cent of appeals to EAT to a first hearing within 26 weeks of receipt.
	Efficiency
	Three per cent. real terms reduction in employment tribunal administrative unit costs.
	In addition to these key targets:
	Finance
	Pay 100 per cent. of invoices within 30 days of receipt of goods or services or a valid invoice, whichever is the later.
	Questions delegated to the Chief Executive
	Reply within 10 working days to all letters from Members of Parliament delegated for the Chief Executive's reply.

Audit Regulation (Annual Reports of the Recognised Supervisory Bodies)

Patricia Hewitt: I have received the annual reports for the year 2003 from the five recognised supervisory bodies for company auditors: a combined report from the Institutes of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland, and one each from the Association of Certified Chartered Accountants and the Association of Authorised Public Accountants. Copies of the reports have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	Schedule 11 of the Companies Act 1989 sets out the requirements which a body must meet to be eligible for recognised supervisory body status. These include requirements to have adequate arrangements for monitoring and enforcing compliance with its rules relating to membership and eligibility (e.g. holding an appropriate qualification, being a fit and proper person, working to technical and ethical standards, maintaining competence), discipline and investigation of complaints. In these reports, the recognised bodies inform the Government about their activities in relation to these arrangements.
	In January 2003, I announced a number of changes to the regulatory regime of the accountancy and audit professions, including the establishment of a new independent inspection unit, located within the Financial Reporting Council, and a professional oversight board for accountancy (POBA), to take over, from this Department, my functions under Part II of the Companies Act 1989 in respect of the recognised supervisory bodies. I am pleased to report that these bodies are now established and in operation. The delegation of these powers is dependent on provisions in the Companies (Audit, Investigation and Community Enterprise) Bill currently before the House and so for the time being my Department continues to have responsibility for oversight of the recognised supervisory bodies.

Coal Authority (Annual Report and Accounts)

Nigel Griffiths: I have today laid a copy of the Coal Authority report and accounts for 2003–04 before Parliament.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Multi-agency Initial Assessment Team Trial

Hazel Blears: As part of the continuing work to improve the capability to deal with major incidents, the Home Office, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Department of Health are sponsoring a trial of a multi-agency initial assessment team (MAIAT) in the London area.
	Comprising officers from the London Fire Brigade, the Metropolitan Police, City of London Police and the London Ambulance Service, MAIAT will provide an initial assessment of potential chemical, biological, radiological or other major incidents.
	The aim of the trial is to see whether a dedicated team could add to the emergency response by providing an early, effective and integrated assessment of the nature and risk of a CBRN incident. The trial will focus on central London.
	The trial will be for one year during which the overall value of the team and the specific tasks it undertakes will be monitored, and lessons would be learned as the team develops. A full evaluation will be done towards the end of 2005, and lessons learned will be shared with emergency services elsewhere in the country.
	This initiative has been developed with the emergency services in London and builds on their strong working relationship. It aims to add to, not replace, the capability we already have for responding to major incidents.

National Offender Management Service

Paul Goggins: On 6 January 2004, the Home Secretary announced the Government's response to Patrick Carter's review of the correctional services and confirmed our intention to establish a national offender management service. This statement outlines the way I intend to introduce the new single service.
	The Carter review highlighted the fact that no single organisation has responsibility for managing offenders. The review proposed that the existing organisations should be absorbed within a new service focused on the end-to-end management of offenders throughout their sentence.
	Since January, I have conducted two consultation exercises and have received nearly 400 written responses. After careful consideration, I have decided that the option of moving immediately to create new regional boards is unlikely to deliver better management of offenders and better services—my two main objectives. Instead, I intend at this stage to concentrate on introducing the concept and practice of end-to-end offender management. There has been widespread support for this approach and it is key to achieving our overall aim of reducing re-offending. I will introduce greater competition within correctional services by using the powers of the Secretary of State but at this stage I have concluded that this can best be achieved through the existing 42 probation boards. This will allow us to maintain important local links with other criminal justice agencies and the experience gained will allow us to take forward future structural change in a more informed way.
	The regional offender managers will have direct responsibility for budget allocation. They will support the existing local boards in moving to an offender management model, manage board performance, develop contestability, and pilot commissioning in their area. They will play an important part in achieving more effective service delivery through greater competition, using providers of prison and community interventions from across the public, private and voluntary sectors and determining where to split purchaser and provider. This approach will give us the opportunity to expose the core of offender management, and not just interventions, to competition.
	The 42 local probation boards will refocus their role around a new statutory responsibility for managing offenders. They are already able to purchase and commission services. The consultation responses show they are eager to respond to the Carter review and to embed the concept of offender management. I want to enlist this interest and enthusiasm although I am also determined that the boards embark on a radical programme of change, not least to extend their commissioning function.
	While the regional offender managers will lead performance and innovation at regional level, individual offender management will continue to be organised locally below the existing area level. I recognise the importance of the links and relationships that underpin effective joint working. The work probation areas currently undertaken in child protection, on the local criminal justice boards, in the criminal and disorder reduction partnerships and in the youth offending teams will continue.
	In parallel to the ongoing development of NOMS and the core concepts of offender management and contestability I intend to proceed with vigour in implementing the other initiatives recommended in the Carter review that are critical to achieving our goal of reducing re-offending, and which have at their heart the proper punishment and rehabilitation of offenders that will lead to a safer society for all.

CAC Annual Report (Immigration and Nationality Directorate)

Des Browne: I am pleased to announce the publication of the independent Complaints Audit Committee (CAC) annual report on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate of the Home Office, for the year 2003–04. Copies are available in the Library of the House and on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's website.
	This is the CAC's 10th report. Their role is to monitor the effectiveness of IND's procedures for investigating complaints about the conduct and efficiency of staff in IND. Their findings are valuable to the organisation.
	The CAC has commended and recognised the continued improvement in the processes involved with complaints handling by IND, as well as the continued support of the IND's senior management team.
	As with previous reports this annual report highlights a number of areas where IND could improve its customer service, supported by a number of recommendations. IND will use these recommendations to help inform their wider change and reform programme.

Refugee Integration Strategy/Refugee Funding Decisions

Des Browne: I am today publishing, and placing in the Libraries of both Houses, a draft for consultation of our new national refugee integration strategy, "Integration Matters". The purpose of the strategy, which applies to England and will replace that set out in 2000 in "Full and Equal Citizens", is to help refugees build new lives in the United Kingdom and integrate to the full: the actions it proposes will enable refugees to achieve their full potential, to contribute to the communities in which they live, and to access the public services they need. It sets out how we will use our investment in refugee services, particularly through the European refugee fund and the challenge fund, to promote these ends. The draft strategy proposes for the first time a set of indicators which, in conjunction with a major study of the experiences of new migrants, will enable us to monitor its effectiveness and make changes where necessary. In this task we will rely on the expertise of the National Refugee Integration Forum, whose role in drawing up the draft strategy has been invaluable.
	In accordance with best practice, we are allowing three months for comment, and we would welcome the widest possible range of contributions: from the public, voluntary, and private sectors, and of course from refugees themselves. Further online copies of the strategy can be obtained from Priscilla.Pegg@ homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk to whom any comments should be sent. We are publishing simultaneously with the draft strategy the results of a skills audit of refugees, which has also been placed in the Libraries of both Houses and forms part of the evidence base underlying the strategy, demonstrating both the wide range of skills brought to the United Kingdom by refugees and the extent of the help which many of them need in order to contribute fully to British society.
	I am also announcing today the grants we are making for 2004–05 from the European refugee fund and the refugee challenge fund. Both funds exist to channel much-needed resources to innovative projects designed to deliver services tailored to the specific needs of refugees. We have been able this year to fund 38 projects for a total of £2.5 million under the European refugee fund, and 79 projects for a total of £3 million under the challenge fund. A list of the successful projects has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Compact on Relations between Government and the Voluntary and Community Sector (Fifth Annual Meeting)

Fiona Mactaggart: I am today placing in the Library of the House copies of the report of the fifth annual meeting, held on 5 May 2004, to review the compact on relations between Government and the voluntary and community sector.
	The meeting reviewed the significant achievements made across Government and the voluntary and community sector to implement and develop the compact. The compact is the blueprint for improving partnership working between Government, at all levels, and the sector.
	The challenge now is to make sure the compact is used as a practical tool to improve public services and citizens' everyday lives.
	The compact action plan in the report of the fifth annual meeting sets out our priorities for driving the relationship between Government and the sector forward this year.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

BBC Charter Review: "What You Said About the BBC"

Tessa Jowell: On 11 December 2003, I announced the first phase of BBC Charter review with the launch of a major public consultation. The consultation was supported by a programme of survey research, visits to different parts of the country to hear the views of people in the media industry and the public first hand, and a series of events for children and young people to hear what they had to say.
	By the time the consultation closed on 31 March 2004 we had received over 5,000 written responses and there had been over 25,000 unique visitors to the charter review website. We published the responses on the internet as the consultation proceeded. The research fieldwork we commissioned was completed in June this year.
	Today, I am publishing the results of this consultation and research. The report we are publishing "What You Said About the BBC" summarises the main points that were put to us. It does not capture every single one of the many hundreds of issues raised, which is why I am also publishing in full the reports of research and consultation on which "What You Said About the BBC" is based. These documents, together with the consultation responses I have already published, should be seen as a complementary package and taken together give a comprehensive picture of the views received.
	"What You Said About the BBC" contains both praise and criticism. Most people indicated that they value the BBC and hold it in high esteem, but a significant minority disagreed. To those who like the BBC it was generally seen as the best broadcaster for news, documentaries and features about personal interests. But even to many supporters it is seen as being by no means perfect. Although satisfaction levels are high, most people want to see changes. However, there is a clear view that the BBC should continue to remain independent of Government, parliamentary and commercial pressures.
	People believe the BBC should keep up with developments in new technology and should be a leading partner in new markets-this will be particularly relevant as we make the journey towards full switchover from analogue to digital broadcasting.
	Contributors clearly felt that there was room for improvement in the way the BBC is governed and regulated, although there is more debate to be had about exactly what changes are needed.
	On the question of how we should pay for the BBC, the licence fee was widely considered to be the best—or rather the "least worst"—method for the time being, although other options were put forward and questions were raised about how the licence fee is set, collected and distributed.
	The findings contained in this report will feed directly into the review of the BBC's charter. As I have said on numerous occasions, the only certain outcome of charter review will be a strong BBC, independent of Government.
	I have placed copies of "What You Said About the BBC" and the supporting research in the Libraries of both Houses. Further copies are available from the charter review website: http://www.bbccharterreview. org.uk.

DEFENCE

Watchkeeper (Selection of Preferred Bidder)

Geoff Hoon: I am pleased to announce the new chapter to the strategic defence review setting out the potential for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) significantly to improve operational effectiveness. UAVs will be a key contributor to network enabled capability and their ability to provide persistent surveillance of the battlefield or theatre of operations, without putting lives at risk has been demonstrated recently by US operations in Afghanistan and coalition operations in Iraq.
	The central element of the UK's current plans for acquiring UAVs is the Watchkeeper programme, which will provide UK commanders with accurate, timely and high quality imagery. Watchkeeper will be an advanced system integrating air vehicles, sensor payloads and ground control facilities. It will be joined to the wider command and control network through communication systems such as Bowman, allowing information to be passed quickly, providing commanders with an improved understanding of the battle space and shortening sensor to shooter times.
	The competition for entry into the final stage of the Watchkeeper programme has been run between two industrial teams led by Northrop Grumman and Thales Defence Ltd. Both submitted bids reflecting an understanding of the programme requirements, the technical complexities, the project management requirements and UK industrial participation. Following detailed consideration of the proposals, on the basis of value for money and demonstration of the best potential to deliver the required capability, the selection of the team led by Thales Defence Ltd will be announced as the preferred bidder for the Watchkeeper demonstration and manufacturing phase by the Secretary of State for Defence at the Farnborough international airshow today. Further negotiations will be required before the project is ready to pass its main investment decision. It is planned to start these negotiations immediately. Depending on the outcome of that work, we aim to make the main gate decision on Watchkeeper later this year. The intention remains to bring Watchkeeper into service as soon as possible with capability beginning around the end of 2006.

HEALTH

NHS Estates and Facilities Management Development Agency (Annual Report)

John Hutton: We have received the NHS Estates and Facilities Management Development Agency annual report and accounts 2003–04 and copies have today been laid in accordance with the requirements of section 5 of the Exchequer and Audit Departments Act 1921.
	The report describes the agency's performance against key tasks and targets and incorporates its accounts for that year.
	Copies of annual report and accounts 2003–04 have been placed in the Library.

TRANSPORT

Air Quality (Heathrow)

Tony McNulty: The Department is today making information available on its website concerning the programme of work promised in the "Future of Air Transport" White Paper to examine how to make best use of Heathrow's existing two runways, and how a third runway could be added after a new runway at Stansted, while complying with strict conditions on air quality, noise and improved public transport access. Copies of the information available today have also been placed in the Libraries of the House.
	The most challenging issue confronting expansion at Heathrow is compliance with forthcoming EU air quality limits. In addressing this issue, we have set up three air quality panels—involving independent experts supported by officials—to help us review the data and methodology used in analysis underpinning the White Paper and to advise on any further research and data that may be required over the next 12–18 months. In addition, work is underway with key stakeholders to explore the issues surrounding mixed mode operations and the options for improved surface access.
	We are aiming to reach conclusions on the prospects for further development at Heathrow in time to contribute to the White Paper progress report promised for 2006. Any proposals that were not consulted on in the run up to the White Paper, such as the introduction of mixed mode, will require full public consultation.
	Early work will be focused on evidence gathering and analysis. We are committed to keeping people involved in this process and informed of any significant developments. In addition to the information and documents that we are making available on the Department's website, we will also hold periodic meetings with stakeholders and interested parties. The information on the web site—available at www.dft.gov.uk/aviation/projectheathrow—provides a summary of the project and its work and gives details of the air quality panels. We will keep this information under review as the project progresses, adding material as appropriate and responding to the feedback we receive.

Crossrail

Alistair Darling: On 14 July last year I announced I had received business case proposals for the east-west London Crossrail project from Cross London Rail Links (CLRL) and that I was establishing an expert team to assess them. On 9 September I announced that Adrian Montague had been appointed to lead the review.
	The Crossrail team had the following terms of reference:
	(i) To establish the full cost of Cross London Rail Link's July 2003 Crossrail business case proposals, and to assess:
	(ii) (a) whether they are likely to deliver to time, scope and budget;
	(b) whether the business case proposals will offer value for money;
	(c) the extent of Government funding that can be justified;
	(d) the proportion of the funding required from non-Government sources.
	(iii) To identify any means of delivering a Crossrail project which offer better performance than the business case proposals against tests at (ii) (a)–(d) above.
	(iv) To report to the Secretary of State as soon as practicable.
	I have studied the Montague findings closely. They broadly confirm the CLRL proposals, but indicate scope for important improvements. I am publishing the report today.
	I have confirmed on many occasions the Government's support for the principle of building a new east-west Crossrail link. Indeed, as the Prime Minister says in his foreword to my transport strategy document today, Crossrail is a project that we want to see delivered.
	In light of the Montague report, and the Government's analysis of what needs to be done to give effect to the suggested improvements, I am now confident that Crossrail should proceed, although a major funding challenge remains and I shall return to that later. I intend that appropriate powers for the construction of Crossrail should be sought by means of a hybrid Bill to be introduced in Parliament at the earliest opportunity.
	The Montague report finds that, while some individual cost and revenue elements may be queried, CLRL's overall indicative cost for the scheme they propose, some £10 billion at 2002 prices, is broadly correct. It would appear to deliver acceptable value for money and provide an effective vehicle to support the Government's regeneration objectives and the creation of sustainable communities both in the Thames gateway and elsewhere, though there is scope for debate about the level of wider benefits that might be realised.
	While the review concluded that there were no pivotal problems with CLRL's proposals, there were nonetheless areas of doubt. In particular, the review questioned whether CLRL's scheme could be operated at the planned high train throughput levels, given the multiple interfaces between Crossrail and the national railway network. The review also questioned the capacity of the construction industry to tackle such a large project in one go, and the suitability of CLRL's current governance structure to delivering the project.
	In aggregate, these concerns create significant uncertainty. Some doubts reflect the nature of a scheme at this stage of its development, and could be expected to be resolved as the design matured, but others—not least those above—are more enduring. As a result, the review could not confirm the deliverability of the CLRL business case proposals as they stood. Montague made suggestions for further work and improvements. I have set in hand the further work needed to ensure that these areas of concern are satisfactorily addressed.
	As provided for by its terms of reference, the review considered alternative ways of delivering a Crossrail project. Specifically, it explored a number of options based on a Paddington-Liverpool Street tunnel that runs broadly along the line of the currently safeguarded central route. All of these represented less extensive schemes than that initially proposed by CLRL and would enable a Crossrail project to be delivered at lower cost. They would also overcome some of the potential interface, capacity and deliverability problems identified above. In particular, although reliability questions arising from multiple interfaces should be substantially alleviated once Network Rail's plans for improved performance on the national railway show results, reducing the number of interfaces between Crossrail and the wider rail network would clearly bring advantages.
	On the basis of the review's work, it is clear that the case for a limb to Richmond/Kingston is relatively weakly developed, and that an extension on the western side to Maidenhead might provide a better solution. This would be a key change, and would align directly with key review concerns about the scale, and deliverability of the project and number of interfaces it has with the national railway. I am today inviting CLRL to bring forward as soon as practicable confirmed route proposals for which powers should be sought in the hybrid Bill.
	CLRL have already asked me to update the safeguarding directions for the central section of its proposed route, replacing the existing ones from 1990 and 1991, which are somewhat out of date. Updating the safeguarding directions would not only protect the route, but also allow affected property-owners access to compensation via the statutory blight provisions. Accordingly, I will now issue safeguarding directions forthwith for the central section of CLRL's plans. Subject to due process, including the necessary consultation with local authorities, I would expect to safeguard the rest of the route, including access for the Thames gateway.
	The review also explored ways of funding and financing Crossrail, including by means of alternative funding mechanisms and a novel stakeholder equity concept, which would involve using a fares supplement to provide passengers with a real stake in the future of Crossrail and to offer protection against project cost overruns. While this is a highly innovative idea that is worthy of further consideration, the potential to use fares as a buffer against cost overruns is limited. It would need to be considered in the context both of the existing fare level and pressures on fares more generally.
	The Montague report makes clear the scale of funding challenge that Crossrail represents. As I explained in my statement last year, those who benefit from Crossrail should contribute substantially to its delivery. The Montague report confirms the likely availability of funds through alternative funding mechanisms but notes that these are not nearly enough to close the very large funding gap. Further work therefore needs to be done to develop a funding solution that is equitable to all parties, and which can successfully deliver a London project of such importance. My Department and HM Treasury will take this forward, working with the Mayor and the London business and finance community. This will include consulting on appropriate alternative funding mechanisms before next Summer, so that those who benefit from Crossrail are in a position to contribute as fully as possible to meeting the costs.
	A key element of a robust project funding plan would be an effective mechanism to ensure that those bearing the risks of the project have proper control of it. In due course, control of a London-based scheme such as Crossrail should lie with London interests directly. However, as the review's report also makes clear, CLRL's current ownership structure is unlikely to provide an effective basis for the robust project governance that will be required initially for the management of the hybrid Bill, and then for the construction of the Crossrail itself.
	Accordingly, I propose to reform Crossrail as a joint venture company between my Department and Transport for London, at least for the purposes of seeking and obtaining the necessary powers. The Secretary of State will appoint, with the agreement of the Mayor, an independent chairman of CLRL, who will have a casting vote on the board of the company. This will ensure that CLRL's Board has the clear decision-taking capability that the current deadlocked structure lacks. TfL will be involved in all aspects of the progress of the Bill and Crossrail could subsequently be transferred for TfL implementation.
	The Crossrail concept has been around in one form or another for many years and commands considerable support from business and the travelling public alike. It has the promise to improve significantly travel into and across the centre of the capital and also to deliver wider benefits, in particular to the east of London. The Government's decision to proceed with this project after decades of prevarication represents a significant milestone in the history of London as we seek to build a transport system fit for the twenty-first century.

CABINET OFFICE

Government Car and Despatch Agency (Annual Report)

Douglas Alexander: I have today laid the Government Car and Despatch Agency annual report and accounts 2003–04 before Parliament, copies of which are available in the Library.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Hong Kong

Bill Rammell: The latest report on the implementation of the Sino-British joint declaration on Hong Kong was published today and copies have been placed in the Library of the House. A copy of the report is also available on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website www.fco.gov.uk. The report covers the period from 1 January to 30 June 2004 and includes a foreword by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.
	I commend the Report to the House.

Constitutional Treaty for the European Union (Provisional Text)

Jack Straw: I have laid before the House Command Paper 6289, containing the text agreed by the European Council on 17–18 June 2004 for a Constitutional Treaty for the European Union (CIG 86/04). Copies have been placed in the Library of the House and the Vote Office.
	This is an interim text of the treaty, which still has to go through a process of technical amendment by jurist-linguists this summer. The Dutch presidency then plan for the final text to be signed by Heads of State and Government on 29 October.
	Command Paper 6289 includes the declarations of the council that will accompany the treaty, and the protocols that are new or directly relevant to the UK (the remainder can be seen in the on-line version of the treaty, at http://www.fco.gov.uk. We will present the final text in full to Parliament this autumn, also as a Command Paper, prior to introducing legislation to give it effect in UK law—subject to its approval in a referendum.

WORK AND PENSIONS

International Labour Conference 2003 (Convention 185)

Chris Pond: The 91st session of the International Labour Conference 2003 adopted a new Convention 185—Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention. We have today laid before Parliament a White Paper entitled "International Labour Conference, Proposed action on a Convention adopted at the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference 2003", (Cm 6290), copies of which have been placed in the Library.

Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome

Jane Kennedy: The Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (IIAC) has completed its review of hand arm vibration syndrome (HAVS) and its report has been laid before Parliament (Cm 6098). The Government thank the council for the care and diligence taken in producing the report, and has decided to implement the report's recommendation to widen the terms of prescription of prescribed disease A11.
	The revised prescription will take account of sensorineural symptoms, which are not included in the current prescription for prescribed disease A11.
	The Department for Work and Pensions is currently working on detailed plans for putting this report into practice, which will include communicating with those representing people who may be affected.